public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
Subject: Re: c/9072: -Wconversion should be split into two distinct flags
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 16:36:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030203163601.4353.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw)

The following reply was made to PR c/9072; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
To: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28@cam.ac.uk>
Cc: 128950@bugs.debian.org, <agthorr@barsoom.org>, <gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>,
   <segher@koffie.nl>, <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: c/9072: -Wconversion should be split into two distinct flags
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 10:31:41 -0600 (CST)

 On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
 > >     Has been analyzed. Patch is even in the audit trail, but
 > >     seems to have become stuck in gcc's patch acceptance machinery...
 > 
 > The patch isn't even one suitable for review, as it lacks testcases.  It
 > is established procedure [0] that patches failing to follow the standards
 > adequately get ignored.
 
 Sorry, don't flame me :-) I am just trying to find ways to get patch 
 submitters and potential reviewers together. 
 
 The bug database is full with reports that have patches attached. If 
 nobody with the ability to judge things takes a look at them, then they 
 will remain open forever. I'm just trying to spark discussion on them. 
 Every once in a while I succeed to get a patch into CVS this way. I think 
 that's better than just letting them sleep.
 
 
 > [0] This is very bad procedure; ignoring patches rather than explaining
 > what is wrong is far too likely to lose potential contributors.
 
 Exactly. If there's someone with little knowledge of gcc processes who 
 manages to find a patch that then never gets any attention, he's not 
 likely to try again next time. If he does get feedback, and be it only 
 that the patch is basically that it is ok but a Changelog entry missing 
 and that the ChangeLog format is described at XYZ, then that'll motivate 
 people. 
 
 I do understand why this is so, but we're doing badly in this field!
 
 Regards
   Wolfgang
 
 PS: Segher - I think the idea of this PR is right, and I would certainly 
 appreciate if you could submit a patch! Thanks!
 
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Wolfgang Bangerth             email:            bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu
                               www: http://www.ticam.utexas.edu/~bangerth/
 
 


             reply	other threads:[~2003-02-03 16:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-02-03 16:36 Wolfgang Bangerth [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-02-03  2:36 Agthorr
2003-02-03  2:06 Segher Boessenkool
2003-02-03  0:16 Joseph S. Myers
2003-02-02 22:54 bangerth
2002-12-29  4:06 Joseph S. Myers
2002-12-29  1:06 Zack Weinberg
2002-12-29  0:56 Segher Boessenkool
2002-12-29  0:46 Zack Weinberg
2002-12-28 22:16 Segher Boessenkool
2002-12-27 15:36 Matthias Klose

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20030203163601.4353.qmail@sources.redhat.com \
    --to=bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu \
    --cc=gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=nobody@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).